I started this topic separately as many people may not be interested to read it.

Dear Glenn, first of let me congratulate you; your family/clan research page is absolutely remarkable and interesting. But, a big part of this great job has no relevance on the question if P-312 being Indo-European or Beaker. I would quote your points in italics which are relevant on this issue and I will comment them one-by-one. My intent is not to destroy your theory on the origins of U-152 or Celts or Indo-Europeans, but to give a “positive critics” in order to go ever closer to the truth (you may agree with me that in pre-historic issues no one can be 100% confident). Both of us being U-152, we are finally cousins, even if 50th or 80th cousins…

These unique markers indicate Irish habitation for at least two millennia or more originating from central Europe, northern Spain or southern France prior to Irish migration.I absolutely agree.

The results of this study indicate that R-U152, depending on its relative age, migrated from the Balkans or Central Italy after the LGM (Last Glacial Maximum) spreading throughout Europe with R1b1c DYS #385a and 385b at 11 and 17 representing a direct mutational link to its 11 and 14 ancestors. If not from the Balkans or Central Italy, it migrated from the east (Scythia), to the Near East, Northwest Africa then to Central Italy remaining in the territory of Nola of ancient Italy until the Bronze Age.It seems to me here that this finding is “prejudged” by the Milesian theory. Most people place U-152 into the Northern Alps, as it appears so later in your page as well.

Connaught is of the Corca Laoidhe and that places it within the Érainn or Goidel, but pinpointing an arrival date prior to 2,500 years ago is not possible at this point.Sure, I also favour a Celtic U-152 migration to Ireland around 500 BC. However, it can be as early as 800 BC, the estimated start of British Iron Age (Llyn Fawr Phase).

R-U152 is approximately eighty-nine percent the age of R1b developing as a Celtic cluster with the age of its development ranging from an estimated 6,541 years to the end of the last ice age or 10,000-12,000 years. This research indicates a Scythian origin for R-U152 DYS #385a and 385b at 11 and 17 in Ireland.The age estimate for R1b1b2h is from R1b1c10 aka S28 by John McEwan. Other age estimates for R1b1b2h are 3,080-4,500 years or 103-150 generations to the most recent common ancestor.These two different parts of your page contradict each other, and recent research suggests that the later is valid. I do not see why the first research indicates a Scythian origin, there is no logical connection between the two sentences.

The Goidel (Gael or Féni) migrated to Ireland from northern Spain or southern France.Sure.

Evidence suggests that Celtic origins spread across Europe from along the Danube, possibly named for the Celtic goddess Danu, through East-Central Europe, Southwest Germany and Gaul to Iberia and the Atlantic. The re-population of Europe after the LGM (Last Glacial Maximum) occurred from the Balkans or Central Italian refugium.I agree with the first sentence and disagree with the second. MtDNA research found that the many frequent Western European haplogroups, H1, H3 and V originated from the Iberian refugium. The Western European spread of R1b is radiating out from this area, even if after the LGM, especially P-312, as the most diverse is in Vascony/Gasconge–Basque area. As I noted in former posts, pre-P-312 R1b was likely to carry the Mesolithic Magdalenian, and its descendant Azilian, Sauveterrian and Tardenoisian cultures. The second sentence is mistaken especially because there could have been no R1 in Europe at the time of LGM, as it occurred later around 18500 BP (see Karafet et al. 2008: New binary polymorphisms…). Therefore R1 (and thus R1b) migration into Europe definitely happened after the LGM but before the Neolithic, from the Middle East. In the LGM regufes only contained Hg I and Hg G plus old remnant populations (1-1 man of BC* E3* F* and K* found in Northern Portugal, see Flores et al. 2004: Reduced genetic structure of the Iberian Peninsula…).

Haplogroup R1a characterized as occurring 10,000 years (BP) before present or before 1950 developed, much later than R1b characterized as occurring 30,000 years BP.As I wrote it before, R1 was re-calibrated, you probably should update this part of your page.

Celtic influence within the territory of the Cisalpine Gaul and the migration from Celtic areas of Central Europe into Northern Italy could explain the Italian results in this research, but other possibilities could factor into the results such as a Central Italian origin.No theory can be simply refused, but a Central Italian origin of the Celts seems very unlikely. I do not want to offend you but it seems you simply want to prove the Nolan ancestry of Celts.

“In addition, even older strains of R1b1c such as the famous R1bSTR47Scots may have migrated from the Continent within the last 3000 years. The most obvious hint of this is that a rural southern Pole (YX8BS in Y-Search) is rather close to the Scots subclade, but not close enough to be a recent immigrant in the other direction. Further investigation is needed, but the final conclusion may very well be that R1bSTR47Scots must have stopped in southern Poland, within the last 3000 years, on its way to Scotland…”I have a more likely explanation: as Celts originated in the Northern Alps, one branch of this “later Scottish” family migrated in north-eastern direction to Poland while the other branch to north-western into the British Isles.

"The Érainn were the second of the Celtic groups to come to Ireland, as discussed in Chapter II. They arrived from the Continent between 500 and 100 B. C., and established their La Tène culture throughout the island as a military aristocracy possessing superior iron weapons technology.That’s exactly what I say.

The major Scottish Clans descend from the Dál Riata of Ireland based on available DNA analysis, and the Niall or Northwest Irish R1b1c7 haplotype exists in Western Scotland. Thus, it is clear from modern genealogy and DNA testing that Offaly - Kilkenny Clan O'Nolan: Connaught at R-U152 (R1b1c10) is a distinct ancient Irish clan or tribe.Niall being L21 (in my theory “Pictish”) does not contradict my theory of L21 being not Celtic speaker originally. It is very likely that U-152 Celtic invaders intermarried with the local pre-Celtic L21 elite.

The Irish, Scottish, Welsh, and English have a close affinity to the people of Galicia, the Basque region, and Spain. Historians place the Celtic invasions of the British Isles in the Iron Age. Modern geneticists, however, argue that DNA testing of the people from Celtic areas of Europe indicates that the migratory movement possibly began some 6,000 years in the past. The commonalities of the people of these areas appear more ancient than historians have predicted.Here I agree with the historians. There were many pre-Celtic migrations to Britain, of course from the continent. My timeline would be:1st wave: Maglemosian R1b1b2* (pre-P312) people – hunter-gatherers (circa 7000 BC)2nd wave: Long Barrows Neolithic people E-M78 (circa 4000 BC) – note: 39% of the men of Abergele, Wales was found Hg E (see Weale et al. 2002: Y-Chromosome evidence for Anglo-Saxon mass migration)3rd wave: Beaker folk R1b-L21 and P312* – introduction of Bronze (circa 2500-2000 BC) – known in British archaeology as Mt. Pleasant Phase.4th wave: Celtic peoples in more waves, R1b-U152 Indo-Europeanized warriors and probably a Druid caste of Indo-European J2. Thus in my view, J2 on the British Isles is not the result of Roman occupation but the “elite” of the Celtic society. See parallel in India where Indo-Iranian J2 is quite frequent among Brahmin Caste and (Indo-Europeanized) R1a is the warrior caste. 5th wave: Anglo-Saxon and Viking migrations from the 5th century – historical age, Germanic peoples

"The Scythians are the common ancestors of the Indo-European people - including the people of Ireland, where according to the traditions of the Lebor Gabala Erren (Book of the Taking of Ireland), the Irish originated in Scythia and were descendants of a King Feinius Farsaid, a King of Scythia.I disagree. In my view the Scythians and Celts (at least in mythic traditions) can have common ancestors in the Thracians but Celts can not be derived from Scythians. If the myths preserved the Thracian origin of the European branch of Indo-Europeans under the name “Scythia” that can result from the fact that they knew Thracians were the same people as Scythians. But unlike in the Kurgan theory, the origin is in Thrace and later migration to Ukraine (see Thraco-Cimmerian article on Wikipedia).

"Scythians" were proto-Slav peoples and that the name was derived from the Slav word "skitati" meaning "wander", "roam".I agree, but they originate from Thrace and not Asia. „Asian Scythians” were named Saka, Sarmatae and so on and those were R1a Finno-Ugric speakers, later absorbed into Turkic tribes.

"The hypothesis under consideration is that all who are S28 positive (thus placed in the phylogenetic haplogroup R1b1c10 /R1b1b2h) are living descendants of these ancient Celtic people who emerged from an Alpine European homeland during the last half of the first millennium BC (roughly 500 BC).I agree.

However, there is as yet insufficient evidence to challenge the view that the populations of western and central Europe are descendants of those who emerged from the Last Glacial Maximum from the Franco – Cantabrian refugium.You disagree with this and so do I. As I wrote it before, R1b did not come from the refuge, but occupied this area after LGM and before Younger Dryas.

"It is now recognized that some of the Thracian tribes may have been Celtic."Yes, as Thracian J2 Indo-Europeans migrated both to northwest and northeast and the elites preserved the name of their names even if they were in minority.Celtic = J2 (Thracian) elite on U-152 people of the Alps and Western HungaryIllyrian = J2 (Thracian) elite on I2 people of Croatia and BosniaItalic = J2 (Thracian) elite on the peoples of Central ItalyCimmerian/Scythian/Balto-Slavic = J2 (Thracian) elite on R1a and I2 people

There is nothing that would suggest that these Scythians were R1b1c10.I do agree with this sentence, I saw you do not. Explanation is above.

Already before 500 B.C. the Celts had emerged as a recognisable people in an area comprising Bavaria, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary and Bohemia. Archaeologists have found valuable remains of this early Celtic civilisation at Hallstatt in Upper Austria and of somewhat later Celtic culture at La Tene in Switzerland.Sure.

It should now be apparent that the Irish Milesian legends had their origins in a Trojan legend common amongst all Romanized tribes of Britain and Gaul. The Romans themselves claimed a descent from the Trojans; and their subject tribes in Britain, Gaul and Germany borrowed their origin tales for their own national histories. The Milesian legends are not historical documents but romantic fiction composed by the Irish bards. Some insist this DNA research somehow validates the Milesian legends, at least the part bringing them from Spain to Ireland.Not surprising as Trojans were J2 and likely proto-Thracians. Therefore, all of the above-mentioned J2 elites preserved the memory of Troy. However, remember that U-152 people personally have nothing to do with Troy, only the Indo-European elite (presumably the Druids) placed it into the Celtic mythological heritage. A part of Irish Celts could have come from Spain (Galicia) of course.

Dr. Kenneth L. Nordtvedt's calculation, with the aid of Jim Cullen, of a time to most recent common ancestor for R-U152 falls within the range for the volcanic destruction of the city and territory of Nola circa 1800-1750 B. C.As I told you, I think this is a part of your personal family-myth building. Nolan people definitely could be Celts who migrated southwards, but it seems to me that you would suggest a Nolan origin of Celts.

Three new and independent sources of genetic data all point to the conclusion that Etruscan culture was imported to Italy from somewhere in the Near East.Sure, they belong to the Tyrrhenian language family. However, I do not think that Lydian ancestry is valid. It is more likely that Etruscans, Eteo-Cretans, Eteo-Cypriots and Lemnians were all descendants of the Neolithic E-M78 people migrating from the Levant and bringing agriculture to Europe by sea.

I hope you find my analysis satisfactory, deep and as scientific as possible. I am waiting for your reply.I hope you are not offended by my detailed critics.

First off, I have no idea who I am dealing with. You are not using your real name and have not provided STRs for comparison. I am 100% confident in the fact that my research is accurate. My research page spans the years 2007-2009. There are some conflicting statements on the research page in question due to the fast moving nature of the advance in knowledge in this industry over that period. Roughly, the introduction, results, and conclusion sections give the most benefit to the readers of my R-U152 research page.

I thank-you for your first comment and appreciate your interest, however, you appear to be behind the learning curve in this industry. It is paramount for anyone interested in participation in the genetic genealogy industry to gain knowledge and learn by reading what has already transpired in the amateur genetic genealogy community over the last several years. It is each individual researcher’s responsibility to learn and gain knowledge.

It does not benefit the amateur genetic genealogy community to engage each and every single researcher who has not fulfilled that responsibility. Believe me, I started out the same way we all do in this industry with no knowledge at all. I commend your interest, but addressing your concerns or critique of my R-U152 research page is not of any benefit to me.

I emphasize your “slave” comment two days ago on this forum as an example. Honestly, it does not benefit the genetic genealogy community to engage such a limited point of view. It is your responsibility to become knowledgeable enough in this industry to contribute. Again, I thank-you for your interest, but dialogue simply for the sake of dialogue is not beneficial.

“Now finally on Norwegian L-21 L21 is very common in Ireland and Scotland, which was the primary settlement and raiding area of the Vikings. They could have take back slaves with them or just some intermixing occured - rich L21 men took a Viking raider's daughter and they moved bach to Norway. I dont know L21 prevalence in Sweden and Denmark, if there is much less L21 than in Norway that would mean my point can be correct.

Feel free to challenge my ideas”

Lastly, I will not be challenging your ideas or responding to your critique of my research. Message posting to this and other forums, lists, and boards may seem of interest to you now, but do not be surprised by the negativity you receive in response.

My name is Tibor Feher, I live in Budapest, HungaryI did the Ethnoancestry test thus I know only that I am U-152+I will order custom SNP on L2 and L20 in April when I will have money for thatEthnoancestry test SNPs - I do not get my allele numbers, that is why I cant share it.

My earliest known ancestor was:Matyas (=Matthias/Matthew) Fejer, born in 1819, in Jaszarokszallas, Hungary.That town lies in the "Jaszsag" where the Yassic/Alan/Ossetian people were settled during the 13th century as they were escaping the Mongol rule (Batu Khan).The Jaszsag was conquered by the Ottoman Turks in 1541 AD and remained in Turkish hands until the 1690s. During the Turkish occupation, the population declinedBeginning from the 1710s, settlers have been invited from all over Northern and Western Hungary plus from Swabia (Southern Germany) to repopulate the fertile lands of the Hungarian Plain. Half of the population of Jaszsag were new settlers by mid-18th century.Now, my ancestors were definitely one of those settlers.

The problematic question to solve is if they were coming from the densely populated parts of Hungary - possibly from Fejer county as it equals our surname - or from Swabia, as U-152 is frequent there, furthermore that region is where U-152 likely occured. If Swabians, then Fejer was a "Hungarianized" name, likely from "Feier" (which means Feast in German).However, the first version seems more probable as Swabians tend to preserve traditions, and there was no traditions of Swabian origin in the late 19th century in our family.The more likely is that my ancestors came to Hungary with the Cottini tribe in the last centuries of 1st millennium BC, and stayed in Western Hungary, Fejer county area until the 18th century. But it would be very hard to find out, as not being a noble family, we have no pedigrees preserved, only what I have done so far.It does not offend me that my ancestors were subdued first by Roman soldiers than by Huns, Avars and finally Magyars, and lost their language and spoke Hungarian. And were living as common peasants. I would still thank for all of them that they worked for their children and now I can be here. I do not need myth-building.

A big disadvantage for my family history is that SNP testing is not widespread in Eastern Europe - few people have even heard about it, few speak reasonably well English even if s/he is interested, and no papers are available in Hungarian. And it is very costly compared to our "budget".

I hope I will have time to read all the already written things in the near future. I am very happy that I turned out to be R1b as this is the most well-researched Hg.I do not want to offend anybody again, but I guess if 80% of Western European were J2 and not R1b, the mainstream idea would be J2 = Indo-European. Let me give only one(!) argument why the centum-satem R1b-R1a can not be valid:These branches were separated before Younger Dryas, around the time when Q Native Americans populated the Americas. Now their languages are so distinct from each other, that it is very hard to establish a relationship (even if Greenberg did with the Amerind Hypothesis). If proto-IE langauge existed around 12000 BP, they would not be so similar as they are from Ireland to India.

Why do you think Indo-European had to exist when the first R1b and R1a came into existence in order for centum Indo-European to have been spread chiefly by R1b1b2 and satem Indo-European to have been spread by R1a1?

Why is the TMRCA of R1b and R1a even relevant to a discussion of Indo-European?

I don't think anyone is silly enough to argue that the first R1b was born into a family speaking some form of Proto-Indo-European or that the first R1a was so born.

So your argument that R1b and R1a predate Indo-European is irrelevant.

It's a little like arguing that mankind predates all human languages and thus is not responsible for any of them.

You provide a detailed family history, which is undoubtedly authentic. I have no reason to doubt your stated heritage.

“The problematic question to solve is if they were coming from the densely populated parts of Hungary - possibly from Fejer county as it equals our surname - or from Swabia, as U-152 is frequent there, furthermore that region is where U-152 likely occured. If Swabians, then Fejer was a "Hungarianized" name, likely from "Feier" (which means Feast in German).

However, the first version seems more probable as Swabians tend to preserve traditions, and there was no traditions of Swabian origin in the late 19th century in our family.The more likely is that my ancestors came to Hungary with the Cottini tribe in the last centuries of 1st millennium BC, and stayed in Western Hungary, Fejer county area until the 18th century. But it would be very hard to find out, as not being a noble family, we have no pedigrees preserved, only what I have done so far.”

I wish you good luck in solving these genealogical issues. DNA may help when DNA testing becomes more widespread throughout Eastern Europe. I hope that happens soon. More data is good for all of us in this industry.

I do not know where R-U152 originally occurred or at what point in history. Southwestern Germany is one possibility. Italy is another. It could also have originated in Central Asia. Where a SNP originally occurs is not my focus.

“I do not want to offend anybody again, but I guess if 80% of Western European were J2 and not R1b, the mainstream idea would be J2 = Indo-European. Let me give only one(!) argument why the centum-satem R1b-R1a can not be valid:

These branches were separated before Younger Dryas, around the time when Q Native Americans populated the Americas. Now their languages are so distinct from each other, that it is very hard to establish a relationship (even if Greenberg did with the Amerind Hypothesis). If proto-IE langauge existed around 12000 BP, they would not be so similar as they are from Ireland to India.”

I thank-you for this, “I do not want to offend anybody again.” I am not a language expert and only briefly mention what you discuss on my research page. As you stated in your first post on this thread my research “has no relevance on the question if P-312 being Indo-European or Beaker.”

Perhaps, others on this forum may engage you on this topic. I am not qualified to defend or object to your conclusions regarding language issues.

I hope your genealogical and DNA research helps you find some answers in your quest.

I know that I jumped in a bit like an Elephant in a chinaware shop (I am not sure this idiom exists in English). But I have read a lot of papers and made lot of statistics regarding Y-Haplogroups and I was really enthusiastic about my result and wanted to share my findings. Now, I will be more cautious, and will try to explain things step-by-step.

I think I was misunderstood because my focus is on Hgs - Languages - Archeological cultures issue, and less on exact family relationship, because until DNA-testing become common in Eastern Europe I can not do any deep resarch on the latter. I also focused on SNPs and not haplotypes.

One of you mentioned, that "L21 is Celtic in Britain and Germanic in Scandinavia". I agree with that in your logic. But I am searching for the source group for these peoples. Centum languages were (partly) spread by R1b1b2 and Satem languages (partly) by R1a1. It is true. As Hg I1 also had a role in the spread of Germanic and I2 in Slavic languges. What I argue is that they are not the source of proto-IE group.You do not have to believe me of course this time, but I will make good arguments, based on Y-DNA studies + History.

I have had a look on DNA archives but the posts are sometimes hard to follow in that form (what is answer n what, where did the basic argument begin etc.)I would rather rely on Studies and statistics + liguistic and archeological arguments.

When I have time, I would first address the issue why R1b1b2 spread from the Southern France/Northern Spain area and not Central Europe, using also mtDNA data and references. Please note, that if someone could have been interested in placing in R1b1b2 origin into Central Europe, especially into Hungary, then that would be me. But my objective is to find the truth and not make my country the place where from most Western Europeans come.

So thanks for not kicking me off the forum and I am again sorry for those who were offended by me unfortunate Norwegian L-21 post.

We are no longer in the stage where we can allow the uninformed to take us backward in this industry. If you are not willing to learn, then step aside and do not complicate matters as some researchers insist on doing. Your reliance on bad science will only be a detriment to any argument you propose. We in the amateur genetic genealogy community have evolved beyond reliance on bad science. Please do not waste our time with what has already been argued to death in this industry. We do not need that kind of distraction anymore.

OK, I got your point...I will try to read the posts at least from 2008 on.

I think the only "weak point" on relying FTDNA and other haplotype-testing is the extreme concentration of samples (British Isles, US, and some Western European). The other problem which I see in FTDNA projects is that the Haplogroup of peoples are often not 100% sure because of the lack of SNP testing.

Now I go, and will read the former achievements of the amateur geneaologists industry, and will come back to the forum after that and if I still have something to contribute.

Just one question: how can pictures (maps) be inserted into posts? I see the "insert image" button but how can I upload the picture?

I believe the below may answer your photo question. As an aside, we delve into genetic genealogy. You appear to focus primarily on linguistics and archaeological endeavors. That is fine. There may be some correlation; however, our primary focus is genetic genealogy.

Insert an photo (image) You may display images (photos), as long as they are stored somewhere on the internet. If you have photos you would like to display, but do not have them saved as a file on the internet, there are a number of websites that will do this for you. Any easy way to do this is with Google Picasa, a free program that allows you to edit photos, organize albums, aznd upload to the web. Here’s how to do it: